3 Answers

+6 votes

Best answer

Hi Esme,

Because you can edit the actual content of the profile with the new merge system, you are no longer able to complete default approved green privacy merges unless you're on the trusted list of both profiles. You'll need to go through the unresponsive profile manager process in order to gain access if requesting trusted list access does not result in you being added.

In that case, would it be possible to remove the default approval for Green profiles after 30 days, and make them behave completely like Yellow profiles? The fact that they get default approved, and that arborists are actually prompted to complete the merge, is misleading.

I have experienced another problem the last few days, even if both the profile managers have given their approval, the merge can still not be completed.

Would all of these now have to be completed by Paul Bech or one of the other leaders. The way it normally worked was that when the second profile manager gave his approval, he would be able to complete the merge, but now these are all stuck on my pending merge list. What is the correct procedure to deal with these merges?

Hm, that's a good question. It could be timing. Is that happening a lot? This seems to happen a lot with private pending merges, too. I'll make sure we look into that part of it. Can they go to their list of pending merges and find them and complete them once the approval from both is in place? It's a pain, but another way to go about it for now until we figure out what's happening there.

Abby, this only started happening since the merge system has been changed.

My problem is that I currently have almost a 100 pending merges that I now first have to make "Trusted List" requests. Then I have to wait at least a week before I can put in an "Unresponsive Profile Manager" request.

After that the team then goes through their process before they complete the merge.

This has now become a very drawn out process, to the point that I am now hesitant to propose merges. Some of these merges has been proposed in December already and still has not been resolved.

But it's always been that way (previous system as well). If one or both of the profiles was Public, you couldn't do the merge unless you were on the Trusted List.

So all you have to do is keep your eyes wide open and notice the little green dots against the person's name, and shrug and say, well I can't do that one. At least we have a huge banner now that stops most of those "why can't I complete this merge" posts on G2G.

Ellen is correct, and Esmé is correct. If both profiles in an approved merge were Public (Green), it WAS possible to merge them without being on the trusted list. You just could not clean up afterwards.

With the new system, since we technically edit the data while completing the merge, it has become impossible to complete a merge involving at least one Green profile. The result is a lot of merges stuck in the Pending state, in spite of being approved.

I understand the desire to protect against careless merges, but this situation can be extremely frustrating and I truly hope it will be functionally addressed. A significant amount of time (and effort) went into the research required before proposing a merge of Dyer-6042 into Dyer-2054, waiting for a response (which did not come) from the other profile manager, and waiting out the 30 days... then ultimately assuming I could complete the merge (I did not see any warning that it was required to be on the Trusted List for the other profile!), only to find on completion that I had earned the dreaded "Permission Denied".

Frankly IMHO when a response is not received, I would much prefer that after 30 days with no response, the Trusted List requirement be waived. "Public" is a very low level of privacy and it seems to me little would be lost, and a great deal of frustration avoided, if this change were made... or at least, if some _streamlined process_ could be put in place by which a waiver could be swiftly requested and approved.

(I will acknowledge that the above merge is an unusual situation involving a complex mix of wrong-gender-at-birth and multiple-naming factors, but I had spelled that out in both the merge proposal and, especially, the bio of the profile I manage... which I had deliberately left open. I confess I have difficulty understanding why there is a need to add any degree of privacy to the profile of an unnamed -- and mis-gendered -- infant who appears only in a birth record.)

Okay, I paid a visit to the profile manager's page and now understand that the lack of response was entirely understandable. So I'll just hope for the best as far as the specific merge in question is concerned -- and for the manager.

But my general comment still stands; we need some efficient, un-frustrating way around the roadblock that now stands in the way of correcting erroneous data... especially when a lot of time & energy have gone into sleuthing out the actual facts.

I too have that problem. Even When I add a death date it still will not complete the merge and the profile is circa 1800 - but not 200 years. Perhaps this requirement should be looser (i.e., enter a death and it goes thru? or check the not living and it opens?) (and yes, have request in to open profile but still pending)